Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/35/2016

M/s.Vasugi Ramanan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.P.Vishnu Kumar - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

30 Aug 2016

ORDER

                                                                           Date of Complaint  : 20.01.2016

                                                                 Date of Order         : 30.08.2016

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT :    THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L.,               :  PRESIDENT                     

                     TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                             :  MEMBER – I

                                                     

C.C.No. 35/ 2016

THIS TUESDAY  30^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016

 

Mrs. Vasugi Ramanan,

W/o. R.Venkataramanan,

24, Bagavantham Street,

T.Nagar, Chennai – 17.                                            .. Complainant.

                                                         - Vs-

Mr. P.Vishnu Kumar, Yogeshwaran Home Care Services, 4/2, Kannagi Street, Kamarajapuram, Velacherry, Chennai – 42.                                         .. Opposite party.

 

For the complainant             :    Party in person.          

For the opposite party          :    Exparte.    

ORDER

THIRUMATHI.K.AMALA,   ::    MEMBER-I

Complaint under section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The complaint is filed seeking direction against  the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.8000/-  and also to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as cost of the complaint.   

2.     Even after receipt of the notice from this forum in this proceeding, the opposite party did not appear before this Forum and did not file any written version.  Hence the opposite party was set exparte on 4.4.2016 

3.     Perused the complaint, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5  filed by the complainant and proof affidavit and the entire C.C. records and considered the arguments of the complainant’ counsel.

4.     The complainant contended that in order to find a female cook to her residence she paid a sum of Rs.8,000/- to the opposite party as service charges on 6.4.2015 and the opposite party also agreed to send a female cook for a salary of Rs.8,000/- per month.   The said cook was also agreed initially to work for both morning and evening.   The cook joined the duty on 7.4.2015 and from the second day onwards she found it difficult to come two times a day and she agreed for a salary of Rs.6,000/- per month for rendering her services in the morning hours only.   So the complainant agreed to pay Rs.6,000/- per month to her.   But she worked only for 17 days and she collected her salary for those days from 7.4.2015 to 23.4.2015 and she was not given any additional work other than cooking for two people of the complainant’s family.  

5.     The complainant further contended she informed the opposite party  that the cook had left her job and that the opposite party agreed to send an alternate cook.   As per the terms of contract in case the cook discontinued her work or complainant stopped her if unsatisfied with the cook’s work the opposite party had to send alternate cook.    Though the opposite party collected Rs.8,000/- he could not send another cook as agreed upon.   From 24.4.2015 onwards the complainant has been asking the opposite party for a cook residing nearby as per the terms of the agreement.   The complainant also issued a notice on 1.8.2015 asking for refund of the amount of Rs.8,000/- paid to the opposite party as service charges.  Since the opposite party did not render proper and complete service, they are liable to refund the entire amount to the complainant.  The complainant also made numerous calls to the opposite party for refund of the said amount but the opposite party spoke unparliamentarily words and abused the complainant.   As per the terms of contact the opposite party is bound to send a suitable cook who would work atleast for six months.    But the opposite party had not acted as per the agreement and thereby committed deficiency in service.  Hence the complainant filed the above complaint for refund of the sum of Rs.8000/- and also Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and mental agony and Rs.3000/- towards cost of the legal expenses.

6.     It is evidenced through Ex.A3 that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.8,000/- towards service charges  to the opposite party for employment of a cook for her residence and it is also found from Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 that the complainant,  opposite party and the cook entered into a contract form and signed the same.    The complainant stated in her proof affidavit that as per the agreement the cook joined her duty on 7.4.2015 for a monthly salary of Rs.8,000/-.   Since the cook found in difficult to work for both morning and evening hours she agreed to render of service only in the morning hours.   As such the complainant agreed to pay a sum of Rs.6,000/- as monthly salary to her.   But she worked only for 17 days and the complainant paid the salary to the cook for those days.  

7.     The grievance of the complainant is that since the cook left the job the complainant gave call to the opposite party to send alternate cook.   But the opposite party did not heed to her request and failed to send any alternate cook.  As per the agreement i.e. Ex.A1 the opposite party had to send an alternate cook in case the cook discontinued her work or if the complainant is unsatisfied with the cooks work.   But the opposite party violated the terms of the contract and failed to send any alternate cook.  Hence the complainant demanded to refund the service charges but the opposite party failed to refund the amount inspite of receipt of legal notice i.e. Ex.A4.  

8.     As per Ex.A1 it is clear that the contract is valid for six months from the date of agreement.  Whereas the facts of the case reveal that within 17 days the cook employed by the opposite party was left.  Hence as per the terms of agreement the opposite party ought to have satisfied the complainant by engaging alternate cook whereas it reveals that the opposite party failed to send any alternate cook and even failed to respond to the complainant.   Once when the contract period is in force the opposite party is duty bound to fulfill the terms of the agreement.   Since he has not acted as per the agreement he is liable to refund the service charges as per the contention of the complainant.  Since the opposite party failed to render proper service to the complainant as per contract even after receipt of valuable consideration of Rs.8000/- the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service.  

9.     Further the contention of the complainant that she faced lot of difficulties to manage the situation without a cook and she was put to physical hardship and mental agony is also acceptable.

10.    Moreover the opposite party had not appeared before this forum in spite of receipt of notice and failed to give any contra evidence to defend  their case and as such they remained exparte.

11.    Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the considered view that the opposite party had committed deficiency in service and as such the opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.8000/- paid by the complainant towards service charges.  The opposite party is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards litigation charges to the complainant.   Since the compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are inclined to award just and reasonable compensation.  

        In the result the complaint is partly allowed.   The opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.8000/- (Rupees eight thousand only) paid by the complainant towards service charges and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) towards litigation charges to the complainant  within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the above amounts of (Rs.8,000/- + 5000/-) shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment.

                Dictated directly by the Member-I to the Assistant and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 30^th   day of August   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 6.4.2015    - Copy of Contract form.

Ex.A2- 6.4.2015    - Copy of Registration.

Ex.A3- 6.4.2015    - Copy of receipt for payment for Rs.8000/-

Ex.A4- 1.8.2015    - Copy of notice to opposite party.

Ex.A5- 3.8.2015    - Copy of Acknowledgement. k

 

Opposite party’s Exhibits:-          

 

.. Nil ..   (exparte)

 

 

MEMBER-I                                                                    PRESIDENT